Our Military: Situation Report
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Matthew Wilkinson on -
And since he didn't I will:
I'm just trying to be a father,
Raise a daughter and a son,
Be a lover to their mother,
Everything to everyone.
Up and at 'em bright and early,
I'm all business in my suit,
Yeah, I'm dressed for success from my head down to my boots,
I don't do it for money, there's still bills that I can't pay,
I don't do it for the glory, I just do it anyway,
Providing for our future's my responsibility,
Yeah I'm real good under pressure, being all that I can be,
And I can't call in sick on Mondays when the weekends been to strong,
I just work straight through the holidays,
And sometimes all night long.
You can bet that I stand ready when the wolf growls at the door,
Hey, I'm solid, hey I'm steady, hey I'm true down to the core,
And I will always do my duty, no matter what the price,
I've counted up the cost, I know the sacrafice,
Oh, and I don't want to die for you,
But if dyin's asked of me,
I'll bear that cross with an honor,
'Cause freedom don't come free.
I'm an american soldier, an american,
Beside my brothers and my sisters I will proudly take a stand,
When liberty's in jeopardy I will always do what's right,
I'm out here on the front lines, sleep in peace tonight.
American soldier, I'm an American,
An American,
An American Soldier
Lesley. Really. When your little revolution is over, will you in fact remember what patriotism feels like at all?
-
Permalink Reply by Derek on -
Wow, that was harsh. I like it. I think it's even funnier that one, you think I have power in the military and two matthew sent me a message me a consolation message like I need to protection to hold on to what you both obviously think is an uninformed an opinion. Assembly line patriotism... there may be a ring of truth to that but don't think for a second I conform to that bullshit propaganda.
So Mrs. Lesley.. how is it that you fight for your freedom to protest in the streets without an m-16 when you're in the military? Because in response to my cliched reasoning behind defending my country you've responded in like with cliched negativity without supporting your opinion.
I was in high school when the marines invaded in 2003 and from what i've heard there was quite a bit of hostility on the ground. You couldn't drive down the street without getting shot at. 6 years later I'm out here and drive down the streets of iraq 2 or 3 times a week and in 7 months have never been shot at. That's quite a change. Do I agree with the premise we used to invade in the first place? No. Do I think it's wrong to use modern imperialism to spread beliefs of democracy to nations that have been standing on their own two feet before the birth of christ? Yes. But I do know there are men out there who's extremist beliefs would destroy everything we know and love in terms of freedom and 9/11 showed their belief system was carrying a scary amount of momentum. Islamic extremist have been responsible for devastating amounts of terror and if we continue to allow it to go unchecked it will spread like a disease. Just look at the aftermaths, all that bullshit airport security, republicans finding reasons to justify invading our privacy with the Patriot Act in for the means of upholding security. Should we really let terrorists affect our lives this much? Where people fear going on cruise ships because they might get blown up or can't bring a gatorade on board a damn state to state flight? Yes you could make the arguement that it was bullshit legislation pushed for by the Bush administration and I don't agree with it but something did have to be done. You sacrifice freedom for security, and people will never know how many more attacks if any would have happened on American soil without that kind of legislation but you're ignorant if you think 9/11 was the only attempt to kill Americans on our soil. The Bush administration did succeed in providing us with security... albeit there were alternative motives and a lot of wrongdoings involved.
So maybe by fighting for freedom you meant using peaceful legislation to fix all the havoc the bush administration caused.. by casting your vote. I don't know I'm not a mind reader that's why I'm asking you. But if you're knockin me because I don't use those peaceful motives right now then are you serious? Do you really believe joining the military is my idea of making change? No, I'm here because the pay is good, I'm gaining useful skills and when I finish this god forsaken contract I'll have 80g's for college. Then I'll be in a position to really make a difference. Because leaders don't just happen, and you'll never earn a leadership position without experience. And nothing says leadership experience then a 5 year sergeant in the marine corps with 3 tours. Granted right now I'm only a 3 year corporal with one tour. But you see what I'm getting at? The military's idea of change is not my idea of change, but they are my means of achieving the resume necessary to be someone who can create change.
And as for all that assembly line patriotism... the ring of truth is this. I don't run the country, I know what the problems are but I don't decide how America chooses to handle them. America chose to go to war.. I can't stop that, but I know that means little kids are going to be pulled from the streets to die a meaningless death. I joined because I'm a good man and I'd rather it be me then those kids I went to school with. I'm capable and ready, if it wasn't me they'd just lower the standards a bit more and take that kid who doesn't even have a future yet. That kid that gets deceived into joining because thier recruiter said he wouldn't go Iraq. And I think I have alot better chance of surviving out here than that kid. So I'm trying to save that kids life. Sure you can call it answering the nations call or whatever bullshit propaganda phrase they tied to it but I'd rather have someone go in with eyes wide open then it be that shithead we all saw in bootcamp crying for his mom wanting to go home. Those kids don't deserve this life.
This response is getting long, i guess it boils down to what my friend always says "you've clearly mistaken me for someone who's motivated." I don't agree with this war, but just because some 20 year old kid stands up and speaks his mind doesn't mean the shit's gonna change. I do it because I was that stereotypical kid who grew up poor and didn't have the money for college, if i survive this place I'll have the money and i can be someone who actually makes a difference. And better me than somebody who got tricked and after a couple years wants to commit suicide, or even worse that real motivator with the high and tight lookin turn into that hard core killer he saw growin up at the movies, cuz we all know the kind of monsters the military can breed in war.
I'd still like an answer. I've gathered your opposed to my opinion but what the are you actually talking about? what did the streets of baghdad look like prior to all of this? So what if you and your husband wear a uniform? are you implying i'm an imposter? I hope you've also gathered i'm not a damn soldier, marines hate being called soldiers. And how do you propose I should fight for freedom or change, being that you too are in the military and granted you may be a conscientious objector are still pretty much fighting for all the reasons I am, or anybody is for that matter. I really don't mean to come off ass an asshole I respect your opinion whole heartedly.. and I really do mean that, but i'm interested to see how you'll explain this without sounding hypocritical.
-
Permalink Reply by Matthew Wilkinson on
-
Derek, haha, you never needed protection and I knew that. Its just instinct, I would defend any one I thought was under unrighteous attack, particularly when they have your job. You are not a total pawn, you volunteered, and this period in your life constitutes a sacrifice of your time, talents, and all with which the Lord has blessed you. And I respect anyone who makes that commitment (inasmuch as they actually deserve it).
And Lesley, I respect you too, but play nice with your fwt playmates. Love is the answer my friend. lol
-
Permalink Reply by Traveling Zach on -
well first of all, Iraq's infrastructure was completely intact, there was no "terrorist cells" there, and before the first Gulf War, enjoyed all the benefits that a US backed dictator would enjoy. Infact Sadam, compared to other US backed dictators, or even just dictators in general wasn't nearly as bad as there have been/are in Iran, South America, Africa and Korea(most of those US backed excpet Korea). Before this current conflict the US actually responcible for more deaths in Iraq that Sadam ever could have been...
One document, written soon after the bombing, warned that sanctions would prevent Iraq from importing "water treatment replacement parts and some essential chemicals" leading to "increased incidences, if not epidemics, of disease."
Another document lists the most likely diseases: "diarrheal diseases (particularly children); acute respiratory illnesses (colds and influenza); typhoid; hepatitis A (particularly children); measles, diphtheria, and pertussis (particularly children); meningitis, including meningococcal (particularly children); cholera (possible, but less likely.)"
Then U.S. Navy Secretary John Lehman estimated that 200,000 Iraqis died in the Gulf War, but many more have died since. UNICEF estimates that well over a million Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S-led sanctions regime, in place for the last decade. Some 500,000 children have died, and an estimated 4,000 die from various preventable, sanctions-related diseases, every month, says the U.N. agency.
Despite the massive human toll, the United States continues to support the sanctions regime, arguing that sanctions won't be lifted until U.N. inspectors are free to return to Iraq to verify that the country has rid itself of weapons of mass destruction.
American Scott Ritter, a former U.N. arms inspector, claims that Iraq is effectively disarmed, and has been for some time.
And deaths from sanctions exceed those from weapons of mass destruction. Political scientists John and Karl Mueller say that sanctions have "contributed to more deaths during the post Cold War era than all the weapons of mass destruction throughout history," including deaths at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
At one point, former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said that despite the civilian deaths the sanctions were "worth it."
Just to get that out of the way...
You definately made plenty of good points regaurding not letting 'terrorism' affect the amount of fear we live in our daily lives, there seems to be still some need to connect 9/11 with our current military engagements, which is baffling to me. How in the world does Iraq have anything to do with that?
And one other question i have about a point you made is how in the world does you being in the military/deployed, stop them from deploying the other new recruits like you pointed out? I don't really get that logic...
Last and this is the hardest one to address, so i really hope it doesn't seem like i'm trying to sound condesending or judgemental, but this is a hard topic. I believe that 'an enemy is just one whos story we haven't heard' and i believe that you've made the bast of your life so far as you know how. But coming from that you then it seem to make the point that this is all ok because EVENTUALLY your gonna change the world, after i make a ton of money supproting illegal overseas military endeavors. I don't see how thats being any sort of change in our culture at all? And actually coming from that stand point, that is probably where yours and Lesleys stories cross the most. How is it ok in any instance to sell kids, like you were, opportunities (which turn out to be lies) for a monetary value? Even more so, you are being paid to provide some sort of support for a military endavor that IS, according to international law, illegal. During the Nuremberg Trials, nazi's were hung for just that, and even less... just following orders. You're just doing it cause it looks good on a resume (and 80g's i guess, which i wouldn't bet on). I really hope that, that will take some reflection time...
les's point is probably that there are so many things you could be doing currently, that i would say, in fact, would make much more of an impact than your money ever could (lol, cause fuck money) take for an example the latest resister of the Afgan war...
Hours Before Court-Martial, Army Resister Victor Agosto Speaks Out ...
-
Permalink Reply by Traveling Zach on
-
actually that whole episode is good, cause it adds both Camilo Mejia, 1st GI to Publicly Resist Iraq War, Appeals Bad Condu...
-
Permalink Reply by Derek on
-
I think this conversation has turned an interesting direction. I just got in country, so i don't have time to respond in depth right now but I definitely intend to. I agree with a lot... actually just about all of what you said and this is the first time i got a chance to read it. I haven't been online lately. But I should have a chance in a week or two. And anyone who is never afraid to tell me their honest opinion i consider a true friend as well.
-
Permalink Reply by Derek on
-
Alright I hope you haven't written me off as a flake after all this time Mrs. Lesley. My soon to be ex-wife has fallen victim to the war I'm afraid. I've spent quite a bit of my time doing damage control. In retrospect I guess I shouldn't blame it on deployment, it was more my fault for having bad judgement in her character. We like to see the best in people and sometimes love blinds you from the worst.
I'll have to disagree with your statement about leaders. I think a leader is someone who exhibits the character and portrays the qualities that others wish to emulate. Therefore leadership is not a rank but a characteristic. I'm not a good enough writer to properly portray what defines a leader but everyone knows a leader when they see one, and I do believe that leadership something that's developed and needs to be consciously improved upon and it's not just something you're born with. Part of that is the ability to bring about greatness in even the most timid of people.
I will concede that my statement about needing weapons to change things was outright wrong at best. But at the time I spoke of the military's ability to hinder our right to stand up for what we believe in. I'm not a pacifist, but I agree with the idea that communication and understanding are the keys to peace. If we could find common ground with our would be enemies then we'll never have such a disagreement that the shedding of blood is necessary. However I whole-heartedly feel that our only enemies in the world are the close-minded. Those who push their agendas on others without consent. I think those people who would rather die than compromise or rather die than agree to disagree are the enemy and against them, peaceful resolution is not possible. However, by taking steps to open the doors of communication around the world and lending a hand where one is needed I think we can slowly break the barriers that produce those kinds of people, and with every good deed we take a step closer towards a world without war.
But the bottom line is we can change ourselves as much as we want, but when confronted with someone who threatens your principles and refuses to compromise, communicate, or let you be, you're left with two options. Fight and risk dying for what you believe in or submit and completely invalidate any reason you had for living in the first place. He who stand for doesn't stand for something stands for nothing. Although I disagree with Teddy Rosevelt's actions, I do believe in talking softly and carrying a big stick. I believe our currently reality is that communication only goes so far... which is a sad truth, but I also believe that changing that reality is what we're all here fighting to do. And that we are capable of opening the doors of communication and mutual respect throughout the world so the generations that come after us will never have to see the terrors of war. Albert Einstein saw a world like that coming to fruition 50 years in the future. That was like 60 years ago. But one day we'll look back at the costly quarrels that have occurred in our history with a sympathetic disbelief and the knowledge that none of it was every really that necessary.
-
Permalink Reply by Matthew Wilkinson on
-
Lesley war will never be obsolete. If you systematically look at the passions involved in warfare, you see that habitual conflict will be difficult for the human species to end. Acts of war typically are designed to evoke "shock and awe"; where massive destruction constitutes a demonstration of collective virility. The premature conviction that war is obsolete has a venerable history of its own. The introduction of the gun, and later artillery, seemed to promise levels of destruction so immense that no state would risk them. After the bloodletting of the Napoleonic Wars, Auguste Comte and John Stuart Mill predicted that war would phase out as nations turned to industrial production. World War I was "the war to end all wars." World War II introduced atomic weapons and similar optimistic slogans. Since then, there have been nearly 200 wars of various shapes and sizes, taking the lives of more than 200 million combatants and civilians.
-
Permalink Reply by Derek on
-
it's like the flobots said, all this ingenuity and we use it to build tools of war instead of taking on issues that really matter.
-
Permalink Reply by Matthew Wilkinson on
-
True.
And whats worse, we don't even agree on the core issues amongst ourselves, which only reinforces what you said about needing to educate ourselves and come to a consensus. Granted I'm paraphrasing you.
-
Permalink Reply by Traveling Zach on
-
"war will never be obsolete"... though stated as a fact, that is in fact, just an opinion...
Though while in our current paradigm it seems like that is true, you know the majority of that reason is cause of the military industrial complex, war is good business. In all reality, once the monetary factor, is taken out of place, to say that 'war will never be obsolete' is really just admitting to a lack of imagination. One of my favorite quotes is 'an enemy is just ones whos story we have yet to hear', i mean, is that really, THAT hard of a concept? just to hear anothers story? not agree or see eye to eye even...
Of course then we could always discuss theories on social evolution, but thats more than i have time for today...
-
Permalink Reply by evan wainright on -
i have a best friend whos mom married a vet and the horrible match lasted all of 2 months.
the odd thing was that they were perfect together in collage before he joined AA.
i think the worst part is the brainwashing. but im just making asumptions based on observations.....her husband (who tried to shove a bottle in my friends mouth before jujitsu got envolved.) and the d.c. sniper (i lived in loudon, a sub. of d.c. during the attacks, at age 8) just assumptions
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Videos
Groups
-
Progressive Veterans
77 members
-
Next Human Evolution
28 members
-
South East Region
39 members
-
Street Fighters of Publi…
8 members
© 2012 Created by Fight With Tools.
